{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-103120", "time_of_filling": "2020-06-18 09:24:57", "domain_names": [ "bouygues-constructionbtp.com" ], "case_administrator": "Šárka Glasslová (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "BOUYGUES" ], "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Enora Millocheau)", "respondent": [ "Above.com Domain Privacy" ], "respondent_representative": "Above.com Domain Privacy", "factual_background": "The following matters relating to the factual background to the dispute are asserted by the Complainant in the Complaint. The Respondent has not filed a Response in the proceeding.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is a French diversified group of industrial companies. Its businesses are centered on two hubs: construction, with Bouygues Construction, Bouygues Immobilier, and Colas; and telecoms and media, with French TV channel TF1 and Bouygues Telecom. Operating in 92 countries, the Complainant’s net profit attributable to the Group has amounted to 1,184 million euros.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant's subsidiary BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION is a world player in the fields of building, public works, energy, and services as further elucidated on the Complainant's website at http:\/\/www.bouygues-construction.com.\r\n\r\nAs a global player in construction and services, BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION designs, builds and operates buildings and structures which improve the quality of people's living and working environment: public and private buildings, transport infrastructures and energy and communications networks.\r\n\r\nAs a leader in sustainable construction, the Group and its 56,980 employees have a long-term commitment to helping their customers shape a better life .\r\n\r\nThe Respondent has registered the disputed domain name and caused it to resolve to a website that carries links promoting various goods and services that appear from the evidence adduced by the Complainant to be in potential competition with the Complainant. The Complainant has therefore filed this proceeding and requested that the disputed domain name be transferred to it.", "other_legal_proceedings": "None of which the Panel is aware.", "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.\r\n\r\nPARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\nComplainant made the following contentions.\r\n\r\n1.\tComplainant is a French company engaged in construction, telecommunications and media. Its subsidiary BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION is a world player in the fields of building, public works, energy, and services.\r\n\r\n2.\tComplainant is the registered owner of the following trademarks :\r\n- The International trademark BOUYGUES n°390770 registered since September 1,1972;\r\n- The International trademark BOUYGUES n°390771 registered since September 1,1972;\r\n- The International trademark BOUYGUES n°949188 registered since September 27, 2007;\r\n- The International trademark BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION® n°732339 registered since April 13, 2000.\r\n\r\n3.\t Complainant also owns, through its subsidiary, a number of domain names including the same distinctive wording BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION® such as , registered since May 10th, 1999, and registered since January 31st, 2013.\r\n\r\n4.\tThe disputed domain name was registered on May 14th, 2020 and resolves to a parking page with commercial links. \r\n\r\n5.\tThe disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademarks BOUYGUES® and BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION® as it is combined with the generic term “btp”, which is generally understood to mean “ batiments tyravaux publics” and in reference to Complainant, its subsidiaries and their activities, after the word “construction”. The addition of that term does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademarks. It also does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant, its trademarks and the domain names associated and nor does the hyphen in the domain name or the generic top level domain ”.com.”\r\n\r\n6.\tThe Complainant has been recognized in prior UDRP decisions to have standing to bring UDRP proceedings.\r\n\r\n7.\tAccordingly, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION®. \r\n\r\n8.\tThe Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\n9.\tIn support of establishing the prima facie case, the Complainant contends that it is required to make out only a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the domain name and that the onus of proof then moves to the Respondent to demonstrate that it has rights or legitimate interests in the domain name.\r\n\r\n10.\tPast panels have held that a Respondent is not commonly known by a disputed domain name if the WHOIS information shows that the domain name holder is not similar to the disputed domain name. The Respondent is not the same as or similar to the disputed domain name as shown by the Whois database in the present case. Nor has the Respondent acquired trademark mark rights on the expression used in the domain name. \r\n\r\n11.\tThe Respondent also has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name as it is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business.\r\n \r\n12. The Complainant contends that the Respondent is not affiliated with it nor authorized by it in any way to use the BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION®. trademark. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent.\r\n\r\n13. The disputed domain name resolves to a parking page with competing commercial links which is not a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate non-commercial or fair use.\r\n\r\n14. For all of these reasons, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. \r\n\r\n15. The disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. That is so for the following reasons.\r\n\r\n16. The domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION® trademark as it contains the trademark in its entirety. The BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION® trademark is well-known. Moreover, the abbreviation “btp” in the domain name means “batiments travaux publics\" and refers to the Complainant, its subsidiaries and their activities.\r\n\r\n17. Given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademarks and reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademarks. \r\n\r\n18. Furthermore, the disputed domain name redirects to a parking page with competing commercial links and the Respondent has thus attempted to attract Internet users for commercial gain to its own website by means of using the Complainant’s trademark and for its own commercial gain, which is evidence of bad faith. \r\n\r\n19. Accordingly, the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. \r\n\r\n20. As the Complainant has made out all of the grounds specified in the Policy It follows that the Complainant is entitled to relief and the Panel should therefore order that the disputed domain name be transferred to the Complainant.\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\r\nThe Respondent did not file a Response.", "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).", "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy).", "bad_faith": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).", "procedural_factors": "The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "The Hon. Neil Brown, QC" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2020-07-14 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner of an International trademark for BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION®, n°732339 registered on April 13th, 2000 ( hereinafter referred to as \" the BOUYGUES CONSTRUCTION® trademark\").\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is also the owner of numerous trademarks for BOUYGUES®, namely:\r\n- The International trademark BOUYGUES n°390770 registered on September 1, 1972;\r\n- The International trademark BOUYGUES n°390771 registered on September 1, 1972;\r\n- The International trademark BOUYGUES n°949188 registered on September 27, 2007.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has established its ownership of each of the foregoing trademarks by means of certificates of registration which the Panel accepts as evidence of the registrations.", "decision_domains": { "BOUYGUES-CONSTRUCTIONBTP.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }